Day could come when Supreme Court rulings openly defied

[Tennesseer]

Editorial: Day could come when Supreme Court rulings openly defied

The breakdown of U.S. Supreme Court legitimacy may already have begun as the public perception of the court morphs from one of respectful observances of the law as interpreted by the nation’s top judicial scholars to a view of them as little more than political hacks in black robes. Various states are on record openly defying Congress by effectively ignoring federal legislative mandates. It could be just a matter of time before defiance of the Supreme Court follows the same track.

Various states already are openly sidestepping federal marijuana laws, legalizing use of the drug even though the federal government outlaws marijuana as a Schedule I drug equivalent to heroin, LSD and methamphetamine. A steady stream of states, starting with Colorado, decided to defy the federal government to the point where federal authorities make minimal efforts to enforce their own laws these days.

Missouri has taken its defiance a step further by asserting a right to forbid police from enforcing any federal gun laws that don’t have a companion Missouri state law. Missouri’s Second Amendment Protection Act has forced local police to cancel cooperative arrangements with federal agencies for fear of losing their state funding if they’re caught helping enforce any semblance of a federal gun law not recognized by Missouri.

This is how quickly federal authority can erode when states decide to go their own way. The U.S. Supreme Court and Congress might be only a few steps away from prompting similar defiance by states that refuse to recognize federal supremacy regarding abortion rights.

After a draft Supreme Court ruling leaked that could overturn abortion rights, Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell stated that a Republican-controlled Congress might move to establish a federal ban on abortion. California is already working on a law that would protect anyone involved in an abortion from being extradited if charged in another state for an abortion offense.

“We can’t trust Scotus (the Supreme Court) to protect the right to abortion, so we’ll do it ourselves,” Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom tweeted. “Women will remain protected here.”

The court’s politicization is no longer something justices can hide. The three most recent arrivals to the bench misled members of Congress by indicating they regarded Roe v. Wade as settled law, not to be overturned.

The Supreme Court has no police force or military command to impose enforcement of its rulings.

Until now, the deference that states have shown was entirely out of respect for the court’s place among the three branches of government. If states choose simply to ignore the court following a Roe reversal, justices will have only themselves to blame for the erosion of their stature in Americans’ minds.

— St. Louis Post-Dispatch

Editorial: Day could come when Supreme Court rulings openly defied

[chiver78]

that's being generous, saying they misled. they flat out, stone faced LIED in their confirmation hearings. what little respect I had for the three of them in those positions (Kavanaugh, just in general), is gone. time to expand the court, to allow the court to regain the balance it had before 2 candidates that should never have been confirmed joined the bench. one for his past missteps and shitty presentation at his televised 'interview' and the other who should have never been allowed to get to confirmation hearings, for consistency's sake. oh, but wait, precedence doesn't matter anymore. yeah, okay. 

[NastyWoman]

In addition to the lies, let's not forget that having not one but TWO, let me repeat TWO, justices on the SC accused of being sexual predators (one of whom has the gall to now complain about legitimacy) does not really help all that much in maintaining the trust worthiness of the Court.

[djAdvocate]

let's not forget that Garland should be the deciding vote, folks.
that was STOLEN from Democrats.
STOLEN.

[seriousthistime]

Agree with all of the above. 

[Tennesseer]

This is why Clarence Thomas needs to resign. It's not as if Ginni Thomas is some 6th-cousin removed relative of Clarence Thomas. Ginni Thomas is his wife. Clarence Thomas's claim he can remain impartial rings hollow. May help SCOTUS regain some trust.

Ginni Thomas urged Arizona lawmakers to pick a ‘clean slate’ of electors just days after Trump’s loss to Biden

ASSOCIATED PRESS
WASHINGTON (AP) — Virginia “Ginni” Thomas, wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas and a conservative political activist, urged Republican lawmakers in Arizona after the 2020 presidential election to choose their own slate of electors, arguing that results giving Joe Biden a victory in the state were marred by fraud.

The revelations first published by the Washington Post show that Thomas was more involved than previously known in efforts, based on unsubstantiated claims of fraud, to overturn Biden’s victory and keep then-President Donald Trump in office.

In the days after the Associated Press and other news organizations called the presidential election for Biden, Thomas emailed two lawmakers in Arizona to urge them to choose “a clean slate of Electors” and “stand strong in the face of political and media pressure.” The AP obtained the emails under the state’s open records law.

Thomas also had written to then-White House chief of staff Mark Meadows in the weeks following the election encouraging him to work to overturn Biden’s victory and keep Trump in office, according to text messages first reported by the Post and CBS News.

Thomas was a staunch Trump supporter who acknowledged she attended the Jan. 6 “Stop the Steal” rally on the Ellipse but left before Trump spoke and told his supporters they should show strength and instructed them to march toward the Capitol, saying he would “be there with [them].”

Thousands among them went on to storm the Capitol complex in a deadly siege that halted for several hours the congressional certification of Biden’s electoral win.

She has been critical of the ongoing congressional investigation into the Jan. 6 violence, including signing onto a letter to House Republicans calling for the expulsion of Reps. Liz Cheney of Wyoming and Adam Kinzinger of Illinois from the GOP conference for joining the Jan. 6 congressional committee.

Thomas was a staunch Trump supporter who acknowledged she attended the Jan. 6 “Stop the Steal” rally on the Ellipse but left before Trump spoke and told his supporters they should show strength and instructed them to march toward the Capitol, saying he would “be there with [them].”

Thousands among them went on to storm the Capitol complex in a deadly siege that halted for several hours the congressional certification of Biden’s electoral win.

She has been critical of the ongoing congressional investigation into the Jan. 6 violence, including signing onto a letter to House Republicans calling for the expulsion of Reps. Liz Cheney of Wyoming and Adam Kinzinger of Illinois from the GOP conference for joining the Jan. 6 congressional committee.

Justice Thomas, meanwhile, has taken part in the court’s consideration of lawsuits challenging the election results. The court turned away every challenge without a hearing, though Thomas was among three conservative justices who said cases from Pennsylvania should be heard. In February 2021, Thomas called the cases an “ideal opportunity” to address an important question whether state lawmakers or state courts get the last word about the manner in which federal elections are carried out.

In January, Thomas was the lone member of the court who supported a bid by Trump to withhold documents from the Jan 6. committee. The documents were held by the National Archives and Records Administration and included presidential diaries, visitor logs, speech drafts and handwritten notes dealing with Jan. 6 from Meadows’s files.

Thomas did not immediately respond to a request for comment, made to the court Friday.

Democratic lawmakers have called on Thomas to step aside from election-related cases, but he has given no indication he intends to do so.

The latest disclosure comes at a time when Chief Justice John Roberts has ordered an internal investigation into the leaking of a draft opinion overturning Roe v. Wade, in one of the court’s most prominent cases in decades, and opinion polls have shown a loss of public confidence in the institution.

Thomas was referencing the leaked opinion at a conference in Dallas last week when he talked about the damage to the court. “I wonder how long we’re going to have these institutions at the rate we’re undermining them.”

Ginni Thomas has said she and the justice keep their work separate. “Like so many married couples, we share many of the same ideals, principles, and aspirations for America. But we have our own separate careers, and our own ideas and opinions too. Clarence doesn’t discuss his work with me, and I don’t involve him in my work,” Thomas told the Washington Free Beacon in an interview published in March.

Thomas sent emails to Arizona House Speaker Rusty Bowers and Rep. Shawnna Bolick, who this year is running for Arizona secretary of state. That would make her the top elections administrator in Arizona.

She wrote them again on Dec. 13, the day before electors met in state capitols around the country to formally cast their votes for president.

“As state lawmakers, you have the Constitutional power and authority to protect the integrity of our elections — and we need you to exercise that power now!” the email said. “Never before in our nation’s history have our elections been so threatened by fraud and unconstitutional procedures.”

Bowers dismissed the idea of replacing Arizona’s electors shortly after the election. The following year, Bolick introduced a bill that would have allowed the Legislature to overturn any presidential election results for any reason, and replace the electors.

Bolick has said her legislation would have made the process more bipartisan by requiring a two-thirds vote, but the text of the proposal calls for a simple majority. In any event, Bowers essentially killed the legislation before it ever came to a vote.

Ginni Thomas urged Arizona lawmakers to pick a ‘clean slate’ of electors just days after Trump’s loss to Biden

[NastyWoman]

May 23, 2022 11:56:56 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

ASSOCIATED PRESS 
...
Thomas sent emails to Arizona House Speaker Rusty Bowers and Rep. Shawnna Bolick, who this year is running for Arizona secretary of state. That would make her the top elections administrator in Arizona.

She wrote them again on Dec. 13, the day before electors met in state capitols around the country to formally cast their votes for president.

“As state lawmakers, you have the Constitutional power and authority to protect the integrity of our elections — and we need you to exercise that power now!” the email said. “Never before in our nation’s history have our elections been so threatened by fraud and unconstitutional procedures.”
...

In all that crap Gini has spouted there is a kernel of truth. The elections are definitely threatened by fraud but she neglects to mention that she, and possibly her sexual predator husband, are among those who want to commit fraud. Oops..."tiny" omission right there.

[djAdvocate]

inoculation at it's finest.
accuse others of what you are guilty.

[haapai]

What's this "the day could come" business?  It's more a matter of the day coming again.  Can't any of you remember what Andrew Jackson said when the Supreme Court ruled on Worcester v. Georgia in 1832? 

Weren't you ever taught that "all deliberate speed" apparently meant something measured on a geological scale?

[djAdvocate]

DJT is battling it out with AJ for the worst president ever.

[haapai]

At least someone remembers history class or what they lived through. 

[djAdvocate]

May 23, 2022 14:33:15 GMT -5 haapai said:

At least someone remembers history class or what they lived through. 

well... i get johnson and jackson mixed up.....so.....

[haapai]

May 23, 2022 14:39:33 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

May 23, 2022 14:33:15 GMT -5 haapai said:

At least someone remembers history class or what they lived through. 

well... i get johnson and jackson mixed up.....so.....

I ain't calling you old.  I'm actually complementing you on having a memory that other folks here seem to lack. 

The Supreme Court's lack of either an army or a purse was drummed into me in a history class back in 1984.  I'm a bit dismayed when folks say that ignoring or defying the court is something new. 

Know your history!

[tallguy]

May 23, 2022 14:26:38 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

DJT is battling it out with AJ for the worst president ever.

Buchanan and Pierce are down in that range too.  I always found it interesting that when looking at the rankings (before Trump was included) we went from #14 through #17 with, "bottom-3 overall", "bottom-3 overall", "top-3 overall (if not #1)", and "bottom-3 overall".  Not taking anything away from Lincoln in any way, but would he look so good in comparison if the ones bookending his term were not so incredibly inept?  Yeah, probably.  

[justme]

Are soctus judges part of a bar still? And if so can they be disbarred? And if so what happens if they are?

[tallguy]

May 23, 2022 22:40:20 GMT -5 justme said:

Are soctus judges part of a bar still? And if so can they be disbarred? And if so what happens if they are?

Supreme Court justices are not even required to be lawyers, so no, I can't imagine one being removed even if they are disbarred as an attorney.

[justme]

May 23, 2022 22:43:58 GMT -5 tallguy said:

May 23, 2022 22:40:20 GMT -5 justme said:

Are soctus judges part of a bar still? And if so can they be disbarred? And if so what happens if they are?

Supreme Court justices are not even required to be lawyers, so no, I can't imagine one being removed even if they are disbarred as an attorney.

Oh blah. I forgot about that. I blame playoff hockey wine.

[djAdvocate]

May 23, 2022 22:38:50 GMT -5 tallguy said:

May 23, 2022 14:26:38 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

DJT is battling it out with AJ for the worst president ever.

Buchanan and Pierce are down in that range too.  I always found it interesting that when looking at the rankings (before Trump was included) we went from #14 through #17 with, "bottom-3 overall", "bottom-3 overall", "top-3 overall (if not #1)", and "bottom-3 overall".  Not taking anything away from Lincoln in any way, but would he look so good in comparison if the ones bookending his term were not so incredibly inept?  Yeah, probably.  

yeah.  Trump is ranked near the top of the bottom four, which i still can't figure out.

Franklin Pierce was an anti-abolitionist.  fucking miserable racist, but he did not engender the Civil War (though his policies certainly contributed to the mounting tensions).  Johnson was an apologist for the Civil War, and nearly threw us into a second one.  i put him below Pierce for sure.  i really do think that Buchanan was the worst.  

i think it is RIGHT to measure Trump in terms of these three presidents, because he is the first president since Buchanan to invite a Civil War.  is he as bad as Buchanan?  not yet.  he hasn't caused a Civil War.  it is probably closer to Johnson (apologist for the Very Fine People of the Confederacy) than he is Pierce (the guy who thought the North had no business protesting slavery).  so, i think it puts him right in the MIDDLE of this group, not the top.  worse than Pierce, and not as bad as Buchanan.  that is some mighty fine company.  not.

it might be that historians rank him near the top because he was largely ineffective, despite having atrocious instincts.  again, so far.  he is falling every day he continues to claim he is president.

[djAdvocate]

to be clear, i am thinking Trump is our generation's Andrew Johnson.  mostly a bumbling, incompetent loser who had no business any where near the Whitehouse, except through the misfortune of a nation.

[tallguy]

May 24, 2022 1:00:49 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

to be clear, i am thinking Trump is our generation's Andrew Johnson.  mostly a bumbling, incompetent loser who had no business any where near the Whitehouse, except through the misfortune of a nation.

No.  While the bolded is certainly true, there is far too much vileness in the man to be only or even mostly that.  Bumbling incompetence ignores that so much of the damage he has done was intentional, and that every national or human interest was subjugated to his own base self-interest.

[djAdvocate]

May 24, 2022 1:16:35 GMT -5 tallguy said:

May 24, 2022 1:00:49 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

to be clear, i am thinking Trump is our generation's Andrew Johnson.  mostly a bumbling, incompetent loser who had no business any where near the Whitehouse, except through the misfortune of a nation.

No.  While the bolded is certainly true, there is far too much vileness in the man to be only or even mostly that.  Bumbling incompetence ignores that so much of the damage he has done was intentional, and that every national or human interest was subjugated to his own base self-interest.

ok, but if so, why are HISTORIANS placing him near the top of this grouping of the four worst presidents in US history?

[tallguy]

May 24, 2022 1:32:01 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

May 24, 2022 1:16:35 GMT -5 tallguy said:

No.  While the bolded is certainly true, there is far too much vileness in the man to be only or even mostly that.  Bumbling incompetence ignores that so much of the damage he has done was intentional, and that every national or human interest was subjugated to his own base self-interest.

ok, but if so, why are HISTORIANS placing him near the top of this grouping of the four worst presidents in US history?

Time will lend perspective.  If we continue down the same path he will be at the bottom soon enough.  If we pull ourselves back he won't.  I am not confident that the GOP will regain any semblance of courage or honor to enable such a pullback, so I expect those historians to eventually reach the same conclusion I have.  Donald Trump is the worst president in American history.

[djAdvocate]

May 24, 2022 1:47:33 GMT -5 tallguy said:

May 24, 2022 1:32:01 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

ok, but if so, why are HISTORIANS placing him near the top of this grouping of the four worst presidents in US history?

Time will lend perspective.  If we continue down the same path he will be at the bottom soon enough.  If we pull ourselves back he won't.  I am not confident that the GOP will regain any semblance of courage or honor to enable such a pullback, so I expect those historians to eventually reach the same conclusion I have.  Donald Trump is the worst president in American history.

if he ends up in jail, that might change their views a bit.  

[tallguy]

May 24, 2022 11:29:43 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

May 24, 2022 1:47:33 GMT -5 tallguy said:

Time will lend perspective.  If we continue down the same path he will be at the bottom soon enough.  If we pull ourselves back he won't.  I am not confident that the GOP will regain any semblance of courage or honor to enable such a pullback, so I expect those historians to eventually reach the same conclusion I have.  Donald Trump is the worst president in American history.

if he ends up in jail, that might change their views a bit.  

If only he could end up being executed that might change their views a lot.   

[djAdvocate]

May 24, 2022 11:41:31 GMT -5 tallguy said:

May 24, 2022 11:29:43 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

if he ends up in jail, that might change their views a bit.  

If only he could end up being executed that might change their views a lot.   

it really was a shame that the GOP couldn't bring themselves to impeach him.  they could have barred him from office, and it would have been historic.  it would also have eliminated the problem.